亚博vip888网页版 040-199135887

10月26日雅思大作文真题参考范文 | 清洁情况到底是谁的责任?

作者:亚博vip888网页版 时间:2021-09-12 10:22
本文摘要:听说每个高分烤鸭都关注了新航道小编雅思作文真题直击 | 栏目推送说明每场雅思考试之后,第一时间分享本场考试雅思A类大作文的范文权威剖析。接待每周锁定。▼专栏作者:唐伟胜新航道特约雅思学术照料广东外语外贸大学教授、博士中国知名英语教育专家《9分达人雅思写作真题还原及剖析3》作者购置点击相识更多或私信小编欲领取2019年雅思/托福机经合集轻戳↙【相识更多】或者关注私信小编2019年10月26日雅思大作文题目该谁来卖力清理情况?

亚博vip888网页版

听说每个高分烤鸭都关注了新航道小编雅思作文真题直击 | 栏目推送说明每场雅思考试之后,第一时间分享本场考试雅思A类大作文的范文权威剖析。接待每周锁定。▼专栏作者:唐伟胜新航道特约雅思学术照料广东外语外贸大学教授、博士中国知名英语教育专家《9分达人雅思写作真题还原及剖析3》作者购置点击相识更多或私信小编欲领取2019年雅思/托福机经合集轻戳↙【相识更多】或者关注私信小编2019年10月26日雅思大作文题目该谁来卖力清理情况?“ Some people think that companies and private individuals, not the government, should pay to clean up the environment in proportion to the amount of pollution they have produced.To what extent do you agree or disagree?”剖析&审题本题审题中有一个暗含的陷阱,因为本题实际上包罗了两个部门:第一部门是“公司和小我私家应该清理情况,而非政府”,第二个部门是“应该根据制造污染的数量的比例来卖力清理情况”,也就是说,你制造了几多污染,你就卖力清理几多垃圾。

可能多数同学都回应了第一个部门,而没有注意到第二个部门。首先看第一个部门:公司和小我私家应该清理情况而非政府。可能我们的直觉是应该同意这个看法,而且认为这个看法很是合理,因为如果公司和小我私家不为情况不卖力,他们就不会主动淘汰污染排放。这个看法基本是可以的,但我们也应该看到,这个看法依然是比力绝对的,因为它只适用人为因素造成的污染(好比乱扔垃圾,使用交通工具等),却不适用那些非人为因素造成的污染,好比火山发作、森林着火等引起的污染,对于那些非人为因素造成的污染,显然应该由政府卖力清理。

因此,这里的讨论应该区分“人为污染”和“非人为污染”两种情况。再看第二个部门:根据制造污染的数量比例来卖力清理情况。这个建议虽然难以实施,但还是一个很好的建议,因为它体现了公正原则,也能对制造污染的公司和小我私家发生重要的制约作用。

以下请看唐老师的高分范文。老师条记01Given the high costs of cleaning up the environmental pollution, some people argue that companies and individuals, rather than the government, should shoulder the financial responsibility of protecting the environment and how much they should pay depends on the amount of pollution they have produced.鉴于清理情况污染的成本高昂,有人认为,企业和小我私家,而不是政府,应该负担起掩护情况的财政责任,他们应该支付几多,取决于他们发生的污染量。剖析(1) 本段开门见山,直接对题目中的看法举行重新表述。

(2) Given 鉴于;由于(3) Depend on... 取决于......02It is certainly true that the government should invoke the ‘polluter pays’ principle and make companies and individuals accountable for the damages done to the environment and human health, because this will make them feel the environmental burden of their action and stop them from doing more harm to the environment. For example, a paper-making factory will be more careful with its wastes if it iscompelled to pay a tremendous amount of money for the water it pollutes, and a car owner may choose to use public transport if he is made to pay an extra pollution fee for driving.毫无疑问,政府应该援引“谁污染谁付费”的原则,让企业和小我私家为他们对情况和人类康健造成的损害卖力,因为这将使他们感受到自己的行为对情况造成的肩负,从而阻止他们对情况造成更多的损害。例如,如果强迫造纸厂为其污染的水支付巨额用度,它就会越发小心处置惩罚其废物;如果让车主为驾驶而支付分外的污染费,他有可能选择使用公共交通工具。

剖析(1) 本段论证让公司和小我私家为其造成的污染是合理的。本段使用的是例证法:枚举了两个例子。

(2) Invoke 援用;使用(3) Accountable 卖力的(4) Compel 强迫(5) A tremendous amount of... 大量的......(6) Extra fee 分外用度03Yet this does not mean that the government has no share of responsibility in cleaning up the environment. In fact, in cases such as volcanic eruption and forest fire, the pollution happens, but not as a result of the improper action of any company or individual. Under such circumstances, the government should be responsible forrestoring the environment.然而,这并不意味着政府在清理情况方面没有责任。事实上,遇到诸如火山发作和森林火灾这些情况,污染是会发生的,但不是任何公司或小我私家的不妥行为造成的。

在这些情况下,政府应该卖力恢复情况。剖析(1) 本段从另外一个角度叙述政府在某些情况下也应该对情况卖力。(2) This does not mean that... 这并不意味着......(3) Volcanic erutption 火山发作(4) As a result of... 由于......(5) Under such circumstances 在这些(种)情况下(6) Restore 回复04It is perfectly reasonable that the companies and individuals who do greater harm to the environment should pay more to clean it up, though many problems may arise when this policy is put into practice. It is, after all, very difficult to determine in exact terms the proportion of pollution a company or individual has produced, and therefore there will be many quarrels about how much a company or individual should pay to deal with the pollution. Nevertheless, I believe that a final solution will be found so that no company or individual will argue over their share of responsibility. 对情况危害较大的企业和小我私家,应该多花点钱来举行清理,这是完全合理的,只管这项政策实施后可能会泛起许多问题。究竟,很难准确地确定一个公司或小我私家所制造的污染的比例,因此,对于一个公司或小我私家应支付几多用度来处置惩罚污染,会有许多争吵。

不外,我相信,最终的解决措施会找到,这样就不会有公司或小我私家为自己的责任分管而争论了。剖析(1) 本段对题目的另一个看法举行回应,即是否应该根据造成污染的比例来确定公司和小我私家应该支付的款子。

本文认为这个措施不错,但很难实施。(2) Arise (问题或情形)泛起(3) Put into practice 实施(4) After all 究竟(5) In exact terms 准确地7分范文Given the high costs of cleaning up the environmental pollution, some people argue that companies and individuals, rather than the government, should shoulder the financial responsibility of protecting the environment and how much they should pay depends on the amount of pollution they have produced.It is certainly true that the government should invoke the ‘polluter pays’ principle and make companies and individuals accountable for the damages done to the environment and human health, because this will make them feel the environmental burden of their action and stop them from doing more harm to the environment. For example, a paper-making factory will be more careful with its wastes if it is compelled to pay a tremendous amount of money for the water it pollutes, and a car owner may choose to use public transport if he is made to pay an extra pollution fee for driving.Yet this does not mean that the government has no share of responsibility in cleaning up the environment. In fact, in cases such as volcanic eruption and forest fire, the pollution happens, but not as a result of the improper action of any company or individual. Under such circumstances, the government should be responsible for restoring the environment.It is perfectly reasonable that the companies and individuals who do greater harm to the environment should pay more to clean it up, though many problems may arise when this policy is put into practice. It is, after all, very difficult to determine in exact terms the proportion of pollution a company or individual has produced, and therefore there will be many quarrels about how much a company or individual should pay to deal with the pollution. Nevertheless, I believe that a final solution will be found so that no company or individual will argue over their share of responsibility. (306 words)建议背诵的句子1. It is certainly true that the government should invoke the ‘polluter pays’ principle and make companies and individuals accountable for the damages done to the environment and human health, because this will make them feel the environmental burden of their action and stop them from doing more harm to the environment.毫无疑问,政府应该援引“谁污染谁付费”的原则,让企业和小我私家为他们对情况和人类康健造成的损害卖力,因为这将使他们感受到自己的行为对情况造成的肩负,从而阻止他们对情况造成更多的损害。

2. In fact, in cases such as volcanic eruption and forest fire, the pollution happens, but not as a result of the improper action of any company or individual.事实上,遇到诸如火山发作和森林火灾这些情况,污染是会发生的,但不是任何公司或小我私家的不妥行为造成的。3. It is perfectly reasonable that the companies and individuals who do greater harm to the environment should pay more to clean it up, though many problems mayarise when this policy is put into practice.对情况危害较大的企业和小我私家,应该多花点钱来举行清理,这是完全合理的,只管这项政策实施后可能会泛起许多问题。4. It is, after all, very difficult to determine in exact terms the proportion of pollution a company or individual has produced, and therefore there will be many quarrels about how much a company or individual should pay to deal with the pollution.究竟,很难准确地确定一个公司或小我私家所制造的污染的比例,因此,对于一个公司或小我私家应支付几多用度来处置惩罚污染,会有许多争吵。

欲领取2019年雅思/托福机经合集轻戳↙【相识更多】或者关注私信小编。


本文关键词:10月,26日,雅思,亚博vip888,大,作文,真题,参考,范文,清洁

本文来源:亚博vip888-www.btbfywjx.com